Would attending school on a 12-month calendar, rather than a 10-month calendar, benefit the school economically?

  • Only a 10-month school year

    Kids need a break from exams and tests. Plus, a whole year would be more expensive. For example, staffs will be paid more, school buses will have to continue working. Also kids need a summer break. For example , kids can go live for a while on a farm and spend their time there.

  • Students should have a year round.

    I'm a student and i think is way better to have a year round. Its better for many ways ; 1.Avoid wasting time on fall review after prolonged summer break . 2. Avoid student fall behind from not being exposed to English during the long summer break. And last after a long summer some kids don't want to go back to school.

    Posted by: suny
  • Its less stressful

    By being on a 10 month school year everything is rushed and harder to learn, therefore i believe that by transferring all school on to a 12 month school year basis it will reduce not only the stress levels of students but it will also increase a students learning ability by far.

  • 12 month school year (A students perspective)

    As a student even I think having a twelve month school year would be more beneficial. Many of the classes I take are a rush to get in information before a giant test, be it the FCAT or the AP exams. A twelve month school year would make my education more useful. A twelve month school year would not only make education less rushed but it would allow for more extra curricular activities (so it wouldn't hurt a students social life), It also allows less time for me to forget materials, and in the end would probably add up to more vacation time then a 10 month school year. It's more realistic as well. What jobs give you a summer vacation?

  • Bring On The 12 Month School Sytem

    I think America should have 12 months school years so that children can remain moral and educated for the whole year. After all, the American kids will suffer from not facing priorities, obesity, being part of gangs, and other problems American kids should not interfere with. Plus, what would teachers do with their two months off? How will kids learn? Will kids join gangs or become obese? Please extend the school year to 12 months.

  • I support the school 12 month calendar.

    We could teach them to think, and analyze and imagine more often than what teachers do now. We teach them how to take the ELA and Math tests for New York State. We could educate them by taking them on all sorts of educational trips since the school buses are free during the school year. Older students could do more internships. Students would have far more learning capabilities. Students are laxed when they come back to school in September. It makes teachers review what students have forgotten when they have all that time off. Mini vacations would be more beneficial in the long run.

  • Kids should go to school for 12 months

    Kids don't want to go back to school after a long vacation and it takes time calling their name so they can wake up and every time they'll come late to school and we the parents come late to work and its not fair that we bust our chops for the kids.

  • Learning is more successful when it is constant

    In many countries education is based on a 12 month calender, student do not have a long break over summer which allows them to forget a large part of what they have learned.

    The long summer holiday means that much of the first few months of school is spent relearning and revising forgotten materials. Also after such a long holiday it takes children a while to get back into the swing of routine and structure. A 12 month calender allows for a year long structured environment,

    Parents do not need to find months of child are or change their own working environments to care for children as well.

  • I agree that school should run for twelve months, as more families today have no one available for summer care for their children.

    Many families have dual incomes or a single parent who works full time, and finding reasonable priced child care over the summers is very difficult, putting a strain on these families. In addition, our school system often has difficulty meeting educational requirements in the existing school structure. Changing how we educate our children, the time given in face-to-face teaching, along with providing families more support, would assist in meeting educational goals, relieving social and community pressure regarding appropriate child care, and keep more children safe and away from negative influences.

    Posted by: MindlessDominick98
  • I agree that attending school on a 12-month calendar would provide an economic benefit, because the school building costs money to maintain even if school is out.

    In a ten-month school year, the school sits vacant for two months. However, that doesn't mean that the school is not maintained during those two months. It must still be kept clean, safe, and temperature-controlled in order to be in working order during the school year. That means that for those two months of the year, the district pays for a school building that no one uses. It would be a better use of that money for the school to be in use, rather than sitting vacant.

    Posted by: R0dHood
  • Bad for kids

    Kids still need to be kids. There are plenty of hard years ahead of them and asking for 3 months of fun to just be a kid isn't much. When they get to be an adult, there won't be time for fun. Also kids need a brake from stress. As I said before they are just kids who need time to be kids. Let them enjoy life for a small part of their life.

  • I believe having schools open year round will end up costing much more money rather than saving money.

    While having school in session for two additional months can create some revenue it will cost more to run schools for two months extra. Teachers will have to be paid, more school lunches will have to be provided, school buses will have to run, and the administrators will have to be paid for the additional months.

    Posted by: 54nShaI
  • There are still kids who need the summer break.

    I personally live on a farm and during the summer we farm the most. If a 12 month school year does happen I wont be able to come and neither will a bunch of kids who still live the American dream of farming.

  • i need help would

    would a 12 month school shcedule benifit a student socaly

  • Attending school on a 12 month calendar instead of a 10 month calendar would increase costs to the school districts.

    There have been many studies suggesting that students would retain more of what they learn if a 12 month calendar school year was implemented. This may be true but in response to the economic impact on the school district this would definitely place a great deal of increased expense on the school districts. A few of the expense would be transportation costs involved with busing students year round instead of 10 months. Also maintenance cost would increase as well as the cost of support staff such as cafeteria worker and teachers aides who are employed on a part time basis on a 10 month schedule.

    Posted by: AndreaS
  • No, but it would benefit parents and teachers finances.

    Economically, the school would carry a larger financial burden. It would have to bear the burden of the cost of operating for two more months than usual. But, the financial burden on the school should not be the deciding factor when considering a 12-month school schedule. Even though the school would not directly benefit financially from a year long schedule, the teachers would possibly make more money and the parents could save on summer childcare expenses. The financial gain of the teachers and parents just might mean financial gain for the school.

    Posted by: MohaI0v35
  • A 12-month school year would cost more because you'd need to employ the faculty for an extra two months, raising salaries, and putting more burden on taxpayers.

    Having school last all year long wouldn't benefit the school systems at all. It would mean paying all of the employees their full salaries for an extra two months of the year. All of the teachers, administrators, the custodial staff, the cafeteria workers, would be on the job and requiring paychecks. Schools can't afford this added financial burden, since most of them have budgetary woes to begin with.

    Posted by: PinkMych
  • It is not economically beneficial for a school to operate 12 months rather than 10 months because of the overhead costs.

    All schools have overhead costs such as lighting and heat or air conditioning or running the cafeteria, that can be partially eliminated by closing the school for two months out of the year. Other costs that are eliminated by closing for two months are fuel for school buses and their drivers.

    Posted by: Nik0Interior
  • I Think School Is Fine Now.

    Andrew Cuomo and the government begrudgingly pay teachers now and barely have enough money to do so. So, how can he pay for another 3 months if he can barely right now? He would end up making the teachers make less money over more time. So all of the teachers who think it is a good idea will be working for free, when it comes down to it. No, I think it is a terrible idea.

  • It would be bad for teachers and students.

    You don't need it, plus teachers would end up not being paid for it either. The same salary would be issued except it would be less every week and you would kind of be working for free - bad idea. Our children would have to go through long, hard days in 112-degree weather and it would be awful. We would have a longer break in January and March, so in the end we would not be going to school any longer, just through the hard hot months. No, it is a bad idea.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.